rule_get

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about error behavior for missing IDs, permissions, or whether the result is a read-only snapshot. Only the generic implication of "get" signals a non-mutating operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three words with no filler and no front-loading problem, but the brevity reflects under-specification rather than efficient communication. It reads as a stub rather than a usable definition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no annotations, no output schema, no parameter coverage, and a large sibling set, the definition leaves essentially everything an agent needs unresolved: what is returned, what a missing rule looks like, and how it differs from rule_list.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the single required parameter "id" is undocumented in both schema and description. The description does not say whether the ID is a rule identifier, name, or slug, nor the expected format.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Get one rule." essentially restates the tool name rule_get; the only added information is the singular "one," which weakly distinguishes it from rule_list. It never says what a rule is or what identifying information is returned.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to call this instead of rule_list, rule_add, rule_remove, or playbook_get. The agent must infer from the name alone that this is the single-record lookup path.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.